The Accuracy of p16/Ki-67 and HPV Test in the Detection of CIN2/3 in Women Diagnosed with ASC-US or LSIL

Imagem de Miniatura
Arquivos
art_POSSATI-RESENDE_The_Accuracy_of_p16Ki67_and_HPV_Test_in_2015.PDF (589 KB)
Citações na Scopus
41
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2015
Editora
PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI
Indexadores
Scopus
Web of Science
PubMed
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Autores
POSSATI-RESENDE, Julio C.
FREGNANI, Jose H. T. G.
KERR, Ligia M.
MAUAD, Edmundo C.
SCAPULATEMPO-NETO, Cristovam
Autor de Grupo de pesquisa
Editores
Coordenadores
Organizadores
Citação
PLOS ONE, v.10, n.7, article ID e0134445, 10p, 2015
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
The objective of this study was to compare the accuracies of double staining for p16/Ki-67 and the molecular test for high-risk HPV (hr-HPV) to identify high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN2/CIN3) in women with cervical cytology of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) and low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL). Data were collected from 201 women who underwent cervical cytology screening in the Barretos Cancer Hospital and their results were categorized as ASC-US (n= 96) or LSIL (n=105). All patients underwent colposcopy with or without cervical biopsy for diagnosis of CIN2/CIN3. The hr-HPV test (Cobas 4800 test) and immunocytochemistry were performed to detect biomarkers p16/Ki-67 (CINtec PLUS test). Two samples (1 ASC-US/1 LSIL) were excluded from the analysis due to inconclusive results of the histologic examination. There were 8 cases of CIN2/CIN3 among 95 women with ASC-US (8.4%), and 23 cases of CIN2/CIN3 among 104 women with LSIL (22.1%). In the group of women with ASC-US, the sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing CIN2/CIN3 were 87.5% and 79.5% for the HPV test and 62.5% and 93.1% for p16/Ki-67. Among women with LSIL, the sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of CIN2/CIN3 were 87% and 34.7% for the HPV test and 69.6% and 75.3% for immunocytochemistry. Superior performance was observed for p16/Ki-67 double staining, especially among women under 30 for whom the test had an area under the ROC curve of 0.762 (p<0.001). Both p16/Ki-67 double staining and the hr-HPV DNA test had similar performance in predicting high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia among women with ASC-US. The best performance was observed in women aged >30 years. In younger women (<= 30 years) with LSIL, p16/Ki-67 had greater accuracy in identifying precursor lesions. Among women > 30 years diagnosed with LSIL, the two methods showed similar performance.
Palavras-chave
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/11967
Referências
  1. Bornstein J, 2012, OBSTET GYNECOL, V120, P166, DOI 10.1097/AOG.0b013e318254f90c
  2. Brown CA, 2012, J ONCOLOGY, V2012
  3. Cox JT, 2003, AM J OBSTET GYNECOL, V188, P1406, DOI 10.1067/mob.2003461
  4. Cuzick J, 2013, BRIT J CANCER, V108, P908, DOI 10.1038/bjc.2013.22
  5. Cuzick J, 2008, VACCINE, V26, pK29, DOI 10.1016/j.vaccine.2008.06.019
  6. Cuzick J, 2012, VACCINE, V30, pF107, DOI 10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.05.088
  7. Dona MG, 2012, GYNECOL ONCOL, V126, P198, DOI 10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.05.004
  8. Edgerton N, 2013, DIAGN CYTOPATHOL, V41, P35, DOI 10.1002/dc.21757
  9. de Oliveira CM, 2013, BMC CANCER, V13, DOI 10.1186/1471-2407-13-357
  10. Holladay EB, 2002, RISK MANAGEMENT CYTO
  11. Kisser A, 2015, BJOG-INT J OBSTET GY, V122, P64, DOI 10.1111/1471-0528.13076
  12. Lapierre SG, 2012, J CLIN MICROBIOL, V50, P1240, DOI 10.1128/JCM.06656-11
  13. Lindemann MLM, 2012, J MOL DIAGN, V14, P65, DOI 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2011.09.005
  14. Loghavi S, 2013, DIAGN CYTOPATHOL, V41, P582, DOI 10.1002/dc.22900
  15. Lonky NM, 1999, AM J OBSTET GYNECOL, V181, P560, DOI 10.1016/S0002-9378(99)70493-X
  16. Mitchell MF, 1998, OBSTET GYNECOL, V91, P626, DOI 10.1016/S0029-7844(98)00006-4
  17. Nanda K, 2000, ANN INTERN MED, V132, P810
  18. Sankaranarayanan R, 1988, IARC SCI PUBLICATION, V15
  19. Sawaya GF, 1999, OBSTET GYNECOL, V94, P307, DOI 10.1016/S0029-7844(99)00289-6
  20. Schmidt D, 2011, CANCER CYTOPATHOL, V119, P158, DOI 10.1002/cncy.20140
  21. Solomon D, 2002, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V287, P2114, DOI 10.1001/jama.287.16.2114
  22. Stoler MH, 2001, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V285, P1500, DOI 10.1001/jama.285.11.1500
  23. Stoler MH, 2011, AM J CLIN PATHOL, V135, P468, DOI 10.1309/AJCPZ5JY6FCVNMOT
  24. Waldstrom M, 2013, CANCER CYTOPATHOL, V121, P136, DOI 10.1002/cncy.21233
  25. Walker JL, 2006, AM J OBSTET GYNECOL, V195
  26. Wentzensen N, 2012, CLIN CANCER RES, V18, P4154, DOI 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-0270
  27. White C, 2013, J CLIN MICROBIOL, V51, P3415, DOI 10.1128/JCM.01949-13
  28. Wong AA, 2012, J CLIN MICROBIOL, V50, P25, DOI 10.1128/JCM.05400-11
  29. Wright TC, 2002, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V287, P2120, DOI 10.1001/jama.287.16.2120

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/14
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - ODS/03